Position Papers on State Reform

The document argues that South Africa's criminal justice system has suffered from significant political manipulation, corruption, and patronage, which have eroded public trust and professional standards. It specifically examines the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), the South African Police Service (SAPS), the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI), and the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID). The paper identifies a lack of rigorous, transparent selection criteria and a dangerous reliance on executive discretion in appointments. To remedy this, it proposes the establishment of independent selection panels, the institutionalisation of 'fit and proper' criteria, and the creation of independent boards of enquiry for removals, ensuring that senior leadership is based on merit and integrity rather than political loyalty.

• Political interference and patronage in the criminal justice system have led to the 'hollowing out' of institutions, enabling impunity for those who should be prosecuted and the diversion of resources from key cases.
• The appointment process for the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) and other senior NPA leaders is heavily concentrated in the hands of the President and Minister of Justice, lacking input from Parliament, professional bodies, or the public.
• The legal framework for appointing the National Commissioner of the South African Police Service (SAPS) is described as deficient, with criteria that are 'less rigorous than for the lowest rank of constable', facilitating political appointments over professional competence.
• The appointment of the Executive Director of the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) is particularly vulnerable to political control because the Minister of Police determines the procedure, and the only requirement is that the nominee be 'suitably qualified'.
• The document proposes that selection panels for senior leaders should consist of up to 10 members from professional bodies and academic institutions, publish candidate names for public objection, and conduct interviews in public.
• To prevent patronage, the paper recommends that appointments to the NPA, DPCI, IPID, and SAPS be non-renewable, with fixed terms of office between 5 and 7 years.
• The paper suggests reforming removal processes by establishing boards of enquiry composed of a judge or retired judge and two other persons to investigate incapacity, incompetence, or misconduct.
• The document argues that 'fit and proper' requirements for appointments must be an objective determination based on facts, rather than the subjective judgment of the President.

APA

Public Affairs Research Institute (2019). Position Papers on State Reform. https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/RevisedDraft_ThematicArea2_AppointmentsRemovals_CriminalJusticeSystem.pdf

Chicago

Public Affairs Research Institute. Position Papers on State Reform. 2019. https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/RevisedDraft_ThematicArea2_AppointmentsRemovals_CriminalJusticeSystem.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Public Affairs Research Institute |title=Position Papers on State Reform |date=18 October 2019 |url=https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/RevisedDraft_ThematicArea2_AppointmentsRemovals_CriminalJusticeSystem.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{publicaffairsresearchinstitute2019position, author = {{Public Affairs Research Institute}}, title = {{Position Papers on State Reform}}, institution = {Public Affairs Research Institute}, year = {2019}, month = oct, url = {https://pari.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/RevisedDraft_ThematicArea2_AppointmentsRemovals_CriminalJusticeSystem.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }